Focused Feedback: Tank Updates for December 6, 2019

[Captain Powerhouse]

2 hours ago, honoraryorange said:

So are cones supposed to be seeing just the arc increase, or also the radius increase?

no.

[Haijinx]

9 minutes ago, Myrmidon said:

Looks like we get cruise control.😁

WP is basically 100% fixed now.  

[honoraryorange]

4 minutes ago, csr said:

Those powers not affected by the inherent arc and radius buff are already noted in their descriptions.  The detailed info for Gauntlet in the power status tray also includes the buffs under Detailed Info.  So the information is there, it's just that the latter doesn't appear until you enter the game and know where to look.  It would be nice if the information was more in-your-face and available during character creation.  But then other ATs don't have that inherent info available either.  A good inherent description on the power set/power choice screen at creation would be nice.

I think I'm honestly just being nitpicky, but I want to make things better for players who don't live and die by reading all the forums and Discord and stuff 🙂

 

Gauntlet's basic power description doesn't list any of this info. But the Detailed info does say:

 +100.00%% strength to AttrArc on self Ignores buffs and enhancements unresistable

+50.00%% strength to AttrRadius on self Ignores buffs and enhancements unresistable

 

I think most people might have a bit of trouble interpreting  that but I guess the community is helpful enough that people will be able to figure it out easily enough.

 

I guess my suggestion for those working on it would be better worded: The Gauntlet normal help text should explain how tankers get boosted arc width on their cone attacks and radius boosted on targeted and point blank AoEs. Also, since Cone attacks are AoEs (by definition) and have a Radius, it should clearly differentiate between the two types of boosts and the powers they apply to.

[Sir Myshkin]

Quote

Tanker > Kinetic Melee > Quick Strike: Should now actually be back at its rightful place.

FINALLY!

 

I've been waiting like... over a month for this to get fixed and testable! These can be rolled now right? RIGHT?! I'm afraid to check.

[Myrmidon]

9 minutes ago, Sir Myshkin said:

FINALLY!

 

I've been waiting like... over a month for this to get fixed and testable! These can be rolled now right? RIGHT?! I'm afraid to check.

Get to work. That Kin Proc build won’t make itself.

[csr]

5 hours ago, ivanhedgehog said:

so how much of a nerf compared to what was on test? By the time they finish debuffung the buff, will they have actually accomplished anything or will it just be an exercise in futility?

It looks like the nerfs relative to the last Beta patch are:

• Reduction in PBAoE radius (50% instead of 60%, giving 225% area as opposed to 256%).
• Reversion of the Taunt target buff down from 7 (which was down from 10) to 5.
• Reversion of the Rage change.
• Reducing Tanker self-buff damage buff strength by 25% (so standard BU does +60% instead of +80%).  Presumably this was done to make stacked BU powers be less effective.  But even the worst case scenarios will be as good.  If you slot 75% damage (this gives close to the worst case) into powers with set bonuses, then the Live version of a double-stack Raged SD/SS Tanker would cap at 3.20 [0.8 Damage Scale times 400% Damage Cap] and the patch version would be at 3.19 [0.95 (1 + 0.75 + 2 * 0.6 + 0.4125)].  Due to the damage cap additional buffs will cause this patch version to pull ahead.  Even a single small red makes it about 7% stronger.  Other set combos and even an SD/SS with more enhancement slotted will do better.  That SD/SS with 75% slotted is as bad as it gets, and that's break even versus Live.

Edited December 7, 2019 by csr
Clarity

[ivanhedgehog]

20 minutes ago, csr said:

It looks like the nerfs relative to the last Beta patch are:

• Reduction in PBAoE radius (50% instead of 60%, giving 225% area as opposed to 256%).
• Reversion of the Taunt target buff down from 7 (which was down from 10) to 5.
• Reversion of the Rage change.
• Reducing Tanker self-buff damage buff strength by 25% (so standard BU does +60% instead of +80%).  Presumably this was done to make stacked BU powers are less effective.  But even the worst case scenarios will be as good.  If you slot 75% damage (this gives close to the worst case) into powers with set bonuses, then the Live version of a double-stack Raged SD/SS Tanker would cap at 3.20 [0.8 Damage Scale times 400% Damage Cap] and the patch version would be at 3.19 [0.95 (1 + 0.75 + 2 * 0.6 + 0.4125)].  Due to the damage cap additional buffs will cause this patch version to pull ahead.  Even a single small red makes it about 7% stronger.

so will it still be a good increse for non SS tankers? it seems they are letting the outlier dictate changes to stop them from being overpowered. these changes dont seem to do any good for em for example.

[csr]

4 hours ago, ivanhedgehog said:

so will it still be a good increse for non SS tankers? it seems they are letting the outlier dictate changes to stop them from being overpowered. these changes dont seem to do any good for em for example.

Well, SS I think ranks last as to how much buff it gets from this patch, but a lot of sets come up relatively short one way or the other.  Titan Weapons gets absolutely nothing from the new Inherent +Arc/Radius buff, though suffers less from the Dmg self-buff change than most and gets target cap increases as well as the new Damage Scale and Damage Cap.  Stone Melee had the radii of it's two AoEs reduced so that it gains nothing from the Inherent either (SS got a similar treatment).  Many just get one power affected.  Claws gets Spin buffed in radius.  Spines gets Ripper and Quills increased, but Spine Burst was actually decreased from 15' to 10' and made to ignore the buff.  Even some sets with two AoEs get such small area increases that the target cap increases seem pretty irrelevant, such as Street Justice and Dark Melee.

 

In a quick pass, here's what I came up with...

 

Sets with no increased area from live to the patch:  Stone Melee, Super Strength, Titan Weapons.

 

Sets with one net power increased in area:  Claws, Energy Melee, Martial Arts, Spines.

 

Sets with perma, near perma or stacking +Dmg that are hurt the most by the self-buff nerf:  Claws, Dark Melee, Dual Blades, Super Strength.

 

Sets that have trouble making use of the target cap increases due to small areas or mediocre powers with the buff:  Dark Melee (Shadow Maul isn't likely to hit 10 in a 7' 90 degree wedge and the area increase has only marginal utility for Dark Consumption on someone with a Taunt aura), Street Justice (Sweeping Cross is 7' 100 degree with 10 targets and Spinning Strike 9' radius with 16 targets).

 

There are no real "losers" in this as every set can use the new Damage Scale and Damage Cap, just sets that didn't come out as well.  In my estimation those are Claws, SS and TW in the bottom tier.  With DM, EM, MA, Spines, SJ and SM in the tier above that.  In that first one you can make an argument as to why each should be there.  In the second only Spines seems like it belongs.

Edited December 7, 2019 by csr

[siolfir]

2 hours ago, csr said:

Spine Burst was actually decreased from 15' to 10' and made to ignore the buff.

I think this should be fixed; if it's going to ignore the buff just put it back at 15' like the other versions, or leave it at 10' and have it accept the radius increase. It didn't get the target cap increase (10 -> 16) and until I just double-checked I thought that not getting any buffs was all that was going to happen with it. There's certainly no reason I can come up with that it should be nerfed only for Tankers, just because Quills and Ripper got better. A net buff was the whole point of the inherent change, right?

 

I also thought that the part stating that it doesn't affect radius buffs may have just been mistakenly added in the description since you can't tell based on the in-game power information and the radius was reduced, so I tested by making a Fire/Spines Tanker, running to RWZ to see where Quills (8' base -> 12' radius) stopped hitting the practice dummies, stepped back until it would hit again, then turned off Quills and hit Spine Burst a few times. No miss indicators, no hits. It's not a typo.

Edited December 7, 2019 by siolfir

[csr]

13 minutes ago, siolfir said:

I think this should be fixed; if it's going to ignore the buff just put it back at 15' like the other versions, or leave it at 10' and have it accept the radius increase. It didn't get the target cap increase (10 -> 16) and until I just double-checked I thought that not getting any buffs was all that was going to happen with it. There's certainly no reason I can come up with that it should be nerfed only for Tankers, just because Quills and Ripper got better. A net buff was the whole point of the inherent change, right?

 

I also thought that the part stating that it doesn't affect radius buffs may have just been mistakenly added in the description since you can't tell based on the in-game power information and the radius was reduced, so I tested by making a Fire/Spines Tanker, running to RWZ to see where Quills (8' base -> 12' radius) stopped hitting the practice dummies, stepped back until it would hit again, then turned off Quills and hit Spine Burst a few times. No miss indicators, no hits. It's not a typo.

From some earlier comments from Captain Powerhouse it seems he felt Spines was over-performing with the changes.  As it stands Spine Burst is pretty bad.  It's really a worse attack than Mu Mastery's Electrifying Fences, which is primarily an Immob.  EF beats SB's DPA 44.11 to 20.01 (on an unslotted 50 with no buffs).  And comes close on the DPC at 2.44 to 3.16 (with +Rech that gap narrows).  They both have 10' radii with 10 target caps.  EF has a 40' range.  The only real advantage for SB is the front-loaded damage.  And even that is mitigated by having an activation time nearly 2s longer.

 

When Captain Powerhouse re-did Thorny Assault he had a poorly balanced first pass that had Impale and Ripper way too good, but then did a second pass where it was so well balanced it was hard to decide what to skip.  Hopefully, he'll do the same with another pass on Spines.  In my opinion he should have followed the Claws example and made Ripper ignore the buff, not Spine Burst.  And Spine Burst should get the 16 target cap (since it's not as good a power as Ripper the aforementioned swap would be a net nerf that should be counter-balanced).  Nerfing mediocre powers such as Spine Burst is a bad idea.  Unless he's got a new animation with half the cast time for Spine Burst.  Then ignore everything I said.  (In other words, he may know of something in the offing that we don't that leads to it all making sense.)

[Captain Powerhouse]

Quills is the power that should had been flagged to ignore radius buffs, not Spine Burst.

[siolfir]

16 minutes ago, Captain Powerhouse said:

Quills is the power that should had been flagged to ignore radius buffs, not Spine Burst.

That makes a bit more sense. At least then you don't have one power that is demonstrably worse for Tankers than other ATs, and if Spines was considered overperforming with the buffs, Quills is the "free" DPS power.

[Troo]

@csr@ivanhedgehog can't 'nerf' something you never had.

[Troo]

10 hours ago, ivanhedgehog said:

it seems they are letting the outlier dictate changes to stop them from being overpowered. these changes dont seem to do any good for em for example.

Gotta keep an eye on the outlier or new fotm. That said, the whole 'make all power sets even' approach has mostly been at the cost of variety.

[Myrmidon]

14 hours ago, Myrmidon said:

Avalanche Proc In Irradiated Ground:

 

Live: does not proc.

Test: Procs like a bad MoFo.

 

Please let that be intentional.

Or, I can be a complete idiot and be looking at the wrong power.🤣🤣🤣

 

It works on live. Disregard.😁

[Brutal Justice]

Here’s how I understand all the chain of events with these changes.  

 

Buff tanks = way too good

 

lower buffs for tanks = still too good

 

buff brutes

even lower buffs for tanks

 

net result = some tank sets perform slightly better than on live and some things have been moved around and changed for the sake of changing things.  Therefore the tank buffs ultimately end up being a brute buff.  

 

Its like gauntlet 3.0.  “Let’s give tanks punchvoke to make them better at tanking than brutes.  Then give it to brutes too because fury is boring and brutes need two inherents.”

 

Poor scrappers.  If they didn’t have their ATIOs they would be completely irrelevant.  

 

This is why changes to help tanks shouldn’t revolve around damage.  

 

[Troo]

Just now, Mr.Sinister said:

Therefore the tank buffs ultimately end up being a brute buff.  

Nicely summarized.

[ivanhedgehog]

38 minutes ago, Troo said:

@csr@ivanhedgehog can't 'nerf' something you never had.

then stop wasting time and go on to something that will actually be useful. 2 months and the tank buffs were better for brutes than they were for tanks. why bother?

[Moka]

With the changes where they are now, I see no reason we can't bring back the endurance buff.

[Troo]

3 minutes ago, ivanhedgehog said:

then stop wasting time and go on to something that will actually be useful. 2 months and the tank buffs were better for brutes than they were for tanks. why bother?

What would you demand of volunteers for your free game?

 

I believe they are learning quite a bit about the challenges of trying to take on balance issues while trying avoid over all power creep and being transparent about it.

[Infinitum]

On 12/3/2019 at 2:54 PM, Captain Powerhouse said:

Tanker self +damage modifier lowered from 1.00 to 0.75 (they still should do more damage than before due to higher base damage modifiers.)

So hypothetically on a shield/sj if I'm currently doing 100 pts of damage with combat readiness and against all odds running.

 

What would the same damage be under these changes?

[ivanhedgehog]

9 minutes ago, Troo said:

What would you demand of volunteers for your free game?

 

I believe they are learning quite a bit about the challenges of trying to take on balance issues while trying avoid over all power creep and being transparent about it.

it isnt a demand. just stating that buffing class a, then tearing down those buffs while buffing the class that you were trying to bring class a in parity too does nothing for the base reason you started in the first place. at the end of the day, will it be worth taking tanks in a tf or are they still sub standard brutes? If you have to hold back the rest of the tank specs just to stop SS from being OP, maybe deal with SS and not leave the rest of tankers in the dustbin?  I appreciate what they have been doing, they are left with years of devs balancing for pvp. It looks like they should make a moderate buff for most specs and make it not effect SS.

[Gobbledigook]

Why not just make ALL the Tanker AoE attacks 10 or 15ft or thereabouts? Instead of sticking with the AoE's we have now but buffing some 50% and others get no buff? Doesn't make sense.

 

Will the Brutes ATO +fury be worthwhile now?

[Troo]

21 minutes ago, ivanhedgehog said:

it isnt a demand. just stating that buffing class a, then tearing down those buffs while buffing the class that you were trying to bring class a in parity too does nothing for the base reason you started in the first place. at the end of the day, will it be worth taking tanks in a tf or are they still sub standard brutes? If you have to hold back the rest of the tank specs just to stop SS from being OP, maybe deal with SS and not leave the rest of tankers in the dustbin?  I appreciate what they have been doing, they are left with years of devs balancing for pvp. It looks like they should make a moderate buff for most specs and make it not effect SS.

That's fair.

As I said, balance while avoiding power creep and without making everything generic, there's a learning curve. Better on test than on live.

[Captain Powerhouse]

1 hour ago, Gobbledegook said:

Will the Brutes ATO +fury be worthwhile now?

On my test you still will have a hard time to get over 80% fury consistently, the change mostly allows a very active brute also get there without having a ton of aggro on them so long they are on a group (and near the group.)

 

That ATO will still be very useful.

 

Edit to add: The reduction in +Dmg mods is not due to Super Strength. I was debating about implementing that from day one.

Edited December 7, 2019 by Captain Powerhouse